TV Licence article Discussion

Cornucopia

To add to that...

- One of the basic issues with BBC/TVL is that they have so few real powers that they have to bluster, exaggerate and lie to get their way. And that is a problem both in and of itself, and also because it becomes difficult to know which elements of the BBC process legally require compliance, and which do not. Strangely, the "great communicator" likes to be vague and secretive about that issue (despite it being a principle of the Human Rights Act that they should not be). However, once you know the truth, hopefully they aren't so scary (though why we tolerate any public body behaving in this way, I don't know).

- The vast majority of TVL defendants are prosecuted through self-confession taken more or less willingly/knowingly from them by a TVL staff member calling at their home. Those people have no obligation to speak to that TVL staff member, and could possibly avoid prosecution by not doing so. Again, there are legal principles around confessions that seem not to be being observed by BBC/TVL. Again, this is shameful.

- Having said that, in my experience the majority of defendants are actually guilty of evasion, even if the procedure and the evidence against them have technical flaws. Having said THAT, the majority of them are also there mainly because of poverty or disorganisation rather than wilful evasion. Also, the BBC's claims that it does not normally prosecute first offenders who buy a Licence would appear to be nonsense.

- The upshot of all that is that it is your right to be legally Licence-free (LLF) if you choose. If you are reasonably assertive and reasonably well-informed about how BBC/TVL operate, then you would have to be unlucky as a LLF person to find yourself in Court on a trumped-up charge, although there are many reports of it happening, especially to those at the less well-informed end of the spectrum, or those who succumb to TVL brow-beating.

All in all it's a nasty can of worms and I blame the BBC and successive Governments for its design and its continuation. I wouldn't criticise any individual too much for not wanting to assert their right to be LLF, against that background. However, it is of course a massive shame for us all individually and a sad day for our society if/when fear(*) of a public body that is out of control leads to anyone denying themselves access to their own rights.

(*) Particularly fear about what might happen in the sanctity of your own home.

JimmyTheWig

WannaBLoaded wrote: »

I've never had a tv license.

And i watch telly all of the time.

We don't advocate breaking the law on these forums.

Cornucopia

To answer the specific questions raised...

"Will it be my word against theirs?" Not in Court, no. By that stage there will already evidence of some sort against you, normally a signed self-confession. Obviously, if you refuse to speak with them, refuse them entry to your home, refuse to accept the caution, query the meaning of the caution, ask to have a Solicitor present and/or exercise your Right to Silence during the proceedings, any of those things will scupper their process.

"How can they prove it?" Generally speaking they don't. They arrive at the front door, and get you to admit you have a TV but no Licence (they already know you have no Licence). Then they simply ask if you watch TV programmes on it. Unfortunately, the TVL staff are often vague and/or ill-informed and so are the public. It's easy in those circumstances to admit to something you haven't done, or to get bogged-down in the detail of the offence. Best advice is not to speak with them at all, say "Goodbye" and shut the door.

"Do I have to disconnect my aerial?" There are no well-defined rules, unfortunately, but it is a good idea to do anything simple/easy that can put your AV equipment beyond immediate use for receiving/recording linear TV broadcasts. Certainly removing aerial fly-leads is a good idea. Detuning the TV as well.

"Do they listen at doors/look through windows?" Those things would be illegal and against their own processes and procedures. However, some staff members have done those things in the past. The difficulty for BBC/TVL is that they still need a name to begin a prosecution, and if you saw them snooping you might be less likely to cooperate than if you didn't. It's all much more of a mind-game than it ought to be.


For anyone unfamiliar with the topic, "BBC/TVL" means "TV Licensing, a part of the BBC". The actual operational TV Licensing "service" is provided by Capita plc on behalf of the BBC. The BBC remains the owner of all legal responsibilities, and the few legal powers involved.

dekaspace

Cornucopia wrote: »

Having said that, in my experience the majority of defendants are actually guilty of evasion, even if the procedure and the evidence against them have technical flaws. Having said THAT, the majority of them are also there mainly because of poverty or disorganisation rather than wilful evasion. Also, the BBC's claims that it does not normally prosecute first offenders who buy a Licence would appear to be nonsense.

I partly agree, when I left home despite living off like £25 a week I shared the cost with flatmates which came to about £27 each a year so for that week it meant I lived off pasta and bread but in later years I would be happy to pay like £30 a year even £35 but they have stupid loopholes such as what they see as seperate households so you could be in a bedsit and pay full whack when you barely have enough room to fit a bed and chair in, or signing seperate contracts but having shared facilities can be seen as seperate households so 1 per room.

Always remember a argument I had in my student years where a flatmate had a license and my tv connected to a computer was in living room, I was streaming itvplayer and one day we got a threatening letter and she was screaming at me how everyone in the flat would be taken to court and fined thousands because of me, and wanted me to move a 60kg tv upstairs (when the stairs were so thin you could barely fit a portable tv up them i.e only about 4 feet wide)

When I said to her that I was 25 and lived away from home for years so knew the law, she was 18 and only just left home she called me stupid lol then printed off the page and circled the bit that said IF you are watching LIVE broadcasts, then wrote below it "see, that means you need a license"

I just avoided her after that and handed in my notice.

Anyway I even now don't mind paying £40 max a license, if they dropped the cost then maybe more people would buy it, but at same time the damage is done from all their years of lies and threats.

WannaBLoaded

Cornucopia wrote: »

"Do I have to disconnect my aerial?" [/B]There are no well-defined rules, unfortunately, but it is a good idea to do anything simple/easy that can put your AV equipment beyond immediate use for receiving/recording linear TV broadcasts. Certainly removing aerial fly-leads is a good idea. Detuning the TV as well.

I've got a massive arial outside of my flat on the balcony, i'm not going to disconnect it just to please them haha. Again, even having an arial outside of your house isn't enough for them to proceed against you.

"Do they listen at doors/look through windows?" Those things would be illegal and against their own processes and procedures. However, some staff members have done those things in the past. The difficulty for BBC/TVL is that they still need a name to begin a prosecution, and if you saw them snooping you might be less likely to cooperate than if you didn't. It's all much more of a mind-game than it ought to be.

I think i had one do that to me once. They apparently like to turn up to peoples houses when there are big tv viewing shows on like emmerdale or champions league footie (not now thanks to bt). I had one of the champions league games on really loud and my lounge door was open. Buzzer went, wasn't expecting anyone so ignored it, few minutes later the letter box get lifted i could hear it. I just shut my lounge door and carried on. Again, not enough evidence without solid evidence of who lives there.

I'm not advocating breaking the law by the way.

There was a time when my tv broke back in the days when i was skint and so i genuinely only watched iplayer, but that wasn't enough to stop the letters or visits. They want to pressure weak people. I am just rude to them now if they turn up which is actually pretty rare. They seem to get the idea when an address is basically sticking its two fingers up at them brazenly because they know you are too clever.

WannaBLoaded

dekaspace wrote: »

Anyway I even now don't mind paying £40 max a license, if they dropped the cost then maybe more people would buy it, but at same time the damage is done from all their years of lies and threats.

In the days before sky, virgin, and any pay per view channels which you can even find on free view, yep. They would have.

But the BBC has found itself in an era where it has been usurped by commerically driven companies that strive to deliver hot content that people WANT to pay to watch and has therefore been so slow off of the mark, always assuming that the government will be behind it, that it now finds itself in a serious hot water.

There should be a referendum on the bbc.

Or, alternatively, the government could tell the bbc to fund itself the way all other companies do.

Either way i think it is out of date and would love to see the death of it.

Why can't i remove the bbc from my channel list, i would gladly. Hardly ever watch it. Most of the shows are crap.

[Deleted User]

Mark_Rogers wrote: »

its almost easier to pay and be done with than to be harassed regularly via post and visits.

If you want to spend £145-50 pa, on something you don't legally need, be my guest.

Personally, I'll continue to save that cash. which, come January 1st, will have reached over £1,000.

But I am not sure if I have the bottle to go through it all.

You don't need "bottle", just common sense, and tight lips.

Will it become a case of my word vs theirs if it goes to court?

If won't go to court, if you maintain a policy of absolutely no contact with them.

How could they possibly prove that I have used my telly to watch live TV?

They can't, unless you show them you have, or sign their self confession form.

Do I have to disconnect my aerial

You don't have to, but it's a good idea.

or remove all aerials entirely? Etc, etc.

No you don't.

the general consensus seems to be refuse them entry and not to self incriminate.

Now you're getting the idea.

But is it really as easy as that?

It's worked for me, for nigh on six years.

It seems there's some uncertainty about how they actually catch people.

Almost everyone prosecuted, lets them in and/or signs the self confession form.

[Deleted User]

WannaBLoaded wrote: »

Why can't i remove the bbc from my channel list, i would gladly. Hardly ever watch it. Most of the shows are crap.

Unfortunately, that wouldn't excuse you from requiring a TV Licence, because a licence is required to watch/record ANY live TV broadcasts.

Yue

Hi there,

Does anyone know whether you're supposed to have a TV license to watch livestreams such as Twitch.tv or Youtube Gaming?

I don't think so, since they are not being broadcast on TV, even though they are live...

But then you have to pay it to watch BBC or ITV or Sky live online, so I'm confused.

Thanks!

DavidP24

Right now you would NOT need a license, the law IS being changed so that the LIVE TV aspect is not a get out and they also plan to remove the criminal record aspect. However, what they really want to do is screw you for another tax, it does not matter that it is the BBC, pretty soon you will need a license to breathe.

So no need for a license but as others have said, DO NOT ENGAGE with these lying scum from TVL, do not answer the door then you will not hear their lies.

If you make the mistake of answering the door, then tell them to foxtrot oscar, they have no right of entry, you are not obliged to answer their questions or tell them your name.

All they are interested in is getting their commission.